锁定加压钢板与解剖型钢板内固定治疗胫骨远段骨折对比分析.docVIP

锁定加压钢板与解剖型钢板内固定治疗胫骨远段骨折对比分析 　　【摘要】 目的：对比分析微创锁定加压钢板与切开解剖型钢板复位内固定治疗胫骨远段骨折的临床疗效。方法：选择2010年6月-2013年10月在本院骨科诊治的胫骨远段骨折患者126例，按数字法随机分为观察组和对照组，每组各63例，对照组采用切开复位解剖钢板内固定法，观察组采用经皮微创复位锁定加压钢板内固定法。术后对比两组手术时间、术中出血量、骨折愈合时间，记录术后并发症，并于术后1年评估两组患者下肢功能恢复情况。结果：观察组与对照组平均手术时间比较，差异无统计学意义；术中出血量及骨折愈合时间比较，差异均有统计学意义（P0.05）。对照组下肢功能评估优良率为66.7%，观察组为87.3%，两组比较，差异具有统计学意义（Z=2.814，P=0.005）。结论：锁定加压钢板内固定法治疗胫骨远段骨折相对创伤小、固定强度高、骨折愈合时间短等优点，值得推广。 　　【关键词】 锁定加压钢板； 解剖型钢板； 胫骨远段骨折 　　Comparative Analysis of Locking Compression Plate and Anatomical Plate in Treatment of Distal Tibial Fractures/SHEN Ming.//Medical Innovation of China，2015，12（04）：058-060 　　【Abstract】 Objective：To analyze the clinical curative effect of locking compression plate （LCP） and anatomical plate in treatment of distal tibial fractures comparatively.Method：126 patients with distal tibial fractures in our hospital from June 2010 to June 2013 were selected and divided into observation group （n=63） and control group （n=63） with number method at random.The patients in control group were treated with open reduction and internal fixation with anatomical plate method， while in observation group with minimally invasive percutaneous LCP.After operation the average operation time， bleeding volume of operation and fracture healing time were compared between the two groups.The lower limb function of patients between the two groups was evaluated after 1 year.Result：There was no significant difference in average operation time being compared between the two groups.About the bleeding volume of operation， fracture healing time there were all significant differences between the two groups （P0.05）.The excellent and good rate of evaluation of lower limb function in control group was 66.7%， and that of observation group was 87.3%.There was significant difference between the two groups about the excellent and good rate （Z=2.814，P=0.005）.Conclusion：LCP in treatment of distal tibia fracture has the advantages of relatively small trauma， high fixing strength and